pannylovernr1 Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Since the Finepics 63 hands project was left hanging and the gen hands are silly 200 USD I'm really started to wonder if the 63GMT rep really have a big problem with its hands and if its worth fixing . Sorry if anyone takes offense (I didn't mean to) since I've borrowed pictures freely. I've only posted this so we can get as accurate reps as possible. Also I've mainly looked at the minute and hour hands as these are the most obvious to spot. First pics of gen 63 GMTs: Then pics of first Davidsen 63 rep and then Josh 63 rep: Notice Davidsen's minute and hour hand are 0.5mm longer than gens while Josh's hands are at least 1.5mm to long. Now putting gen hands on a rep: Notice the gen hands on the rep are still 0.5mm longer than gens, which to me looks exactly like the length of Davidsen's hands on his rep. Another pic comparing gen dial&hands left and gen hands on a rep dial right (correct me if I'm wrong, got this pic of this forum, from TK471): Compared to the gen pics at the very top, this looks like fitting gen hands on a rep dial also in this case make the hands look to long. Also notice how much shorter the gen hands/dial are compared to the othr gens at the top (differences in length also between the gens). So like mentioned before on this forum, the dial could make all the difference when fitting gen hands. The gen hands looks like they come out to long on a rep dial. Would the most accurate and cost effective way be to just buy the Davidsen hands and dial combo instead of fitting gen hands on for example a Josh/Trusty 63 GMT rep?? Would fitting gen hands on a Davidsen dial come out to short? I don't know, What do you guys think??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finepics Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 The only way I can see to fix this is to have the hands specially made. I have been fiddling worth the picture of the dials and the rep printing is in a different place so having the effect of making the hands appear longer. I don't think there is really any other way to solve this. My hand project was only to make the GMT hand for the PAM 88/89 etc - not the 063 full set so this would not have solved this in any case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finepics Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Just realised that I have a set of DSN GMT hands here - the minute hand is exactly the same as the standard rep hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pannylovernr1 Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Thanks for the reply Finepics, hopefully one of the dealers will make these updated shorter hand sets for the 63 soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pannylovernr1 Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Just realised that I have a set of DSN GMT hands here - the minute hand is exactly the same as the standard rep hand. So maybe this means the best cost effective way to get the 63 accurate is to fit a Davidsen dial instead of installing gen hands, if one have a Josh/Trusty 63? And if one already have a Davidsen dial then shell out 200$ for the gen hands but risking the hands being to short? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 So maybe this means the best cost effective way to get the 63 accurate is to fit a Davidsen dial instead of installing gen hands, if one have a Josh/Trusty 63? And if one already have a Davidsen dial then shell out 200$ for the gen hands but risking the hands being to short? You are kidding me right?? Davidsen's dial is sooo inaccurate that you mind about the 0,5mm of the hands being short or long???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pannylovernr1 Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Hmm, have to agree with you there V. Davidsens dial font is both wrong and is too thin but is the Josh/Trusty really that much better? Also I don't care about 0.5mm, I DO care if spending 200 dollars is going to get me a less accurate watch. I've almost pulled the trigger on the gen hands today but having a hard time justifying it. Compare Gen dial here w/ Davidsen and then Josh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK471 Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 The gen hands aren't going to make the dial LESS accurate, but they won't make it much MORE accurate. And you're right, it's absolutely crazy to spend $200 on the gen hands, and I say that as someone who has. It's a printing issue, pure and simple. Davidsen's dial is not the answer here. The only answer is to have hands specially made that are significantly shorter than the genuine hands so that the fact the printing is set more inward is accounted for. IMO, not really worth it. The gen hands are MUCH better finished than the rep hands, but NOT for the amount of money you spend on them. There is a bottom line here. It is do what you can to the watch, fix the obvious things: the crown, the date wheel, the cyclops. But learn to live with those hands. No one will notice, it won't matter, and the watch is going to be great. Learn from my mistake fellas. Trust me on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavor flav Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 i will give my opinion here..... no one will notice the length of the hands is not right unless you are in the AD doing a side by side comparison so what's the point to go crazy with dials and such? i will say the finish and lume on the gen hands makes a big upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavor flav Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 also i will add that the lume color on davidsen's looks way off.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pannylovernr1 Posted December 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 Thanks everyone for answering these hands and dials questions. Cleared a lot of stuff up for me . I've spent a lot of money on watches and upgrades, some good some bad. Reading up in these forums will probably get me and everyone else putting the money in things that will be worth it. Those gen hands look perfect, but so they are, they're gen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cskent69 Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 I am sure that all of us 2893 063 owners have been contemplating a fix. The obvious fix is to get a new dial. No easy feat unless they suddenly decide to make a new run of the 2836 063's. All that said, when I look at your great picture, the gen hands on the left do look shorter even with respect to the end of the dial (trying not to be affected by the optical illusion of the numbers, etc. It may be me - but i think that the whole gen dial is larger than the rep dial (did we already establish that?) by the 1MM. That would further explain the difference. Hope i am making myself clear. If I am wrong - it makes me wonder how the gen dial might fit in the rep case. would the numbers fall under the case and get cut off? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rqthrottle Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 I'm pretty happy with the hands on mine. I don't lose any sleep over 1mm more or less. The law of diminishing returns kicks in at full force when you get that picky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK471 Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 It looks to me like your GMT hand is the right length. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.